googologywikiaorg-20200223-history
User talk:ARsygo/ExE generator of googologisms
Eyelash-mite chime What is eyelash-mite chime? Is it 2*10^(4*10)=2*10^40 or (2*10^4)^10=1.024*10^43? Rpakr (talk) 00:20, November 13, 2017 (UTC) :And because of n-chime means n^10, so I think the latter is eyelash-mite chime, rather than former. ARsygo (talk) 00:23, November 13, 2017 (UTC) :Thank you. Rpakr (talk) 23:46, November 13, 2017 (UTC) -plex on non-powers What's eyelash miteplex? Is it 2*10^10^4 or 10^(2*10^4)? And think about the -dex suffix. Googol = E100 and googoldex = E100#1#2 = E100#(googol). Then what's eyelash mitedex? {hyp/^,cos} (talk) 13:29, November 16, 2017 (UTC) Based on the -plex definition, eyelash mite-plex is equal to the latter (10^(2*10^4)) rather than the former (2*10^10^4), which is much much smaller. And as for the -dex suffix, the -dex suffix is not applicable for non-powers, making the eyelash mite-dex is ill-defined. ARsygo (talk) 13:52, November 16, 2017 (UTC) If we put the non-power part aside, and apply suffixes to only the power part (like eyelash mitechime = 2*10^40 and eyelash miteplex = 2*10^10^4), then we can define such numbers as eyelash mitedex = 2*E4#1#2, eyelash mitethrex = 2*E4#1#1#2, and great eyelash mite = 2*E4##1#2. {hyp/^,cos} (talk) 00:04, November 17, 2017 (UTC) Anyway, I think that -plex should be kept based on the definition (n-plex means 10^n), but the other suffixes such as -chime or -dex applied to non powers and apply it to only the power part (where n is an integer). ARsygo (talk) 00:23, November 17, 2017 (UTC) How does -suplex works Gugolda-suplex is E100##100#2, so it seems that -suplex add one to the entry after a # after a ##. However, the unmodified number should be written in Ea##b or Ea##b#c. Then what's googolplexisuplex (where googolplex can't be written in Ea##b form)? {hyp/^,cos} (talk) 01:20, November 17, 2017 (UTC) Since great googol is equal to E100##1#2, when expanding, it becomes E100#100#100...#100#100 (with googol #'s). But, googolplexisuplex (or great googolplex) is supposed to be the same thing as great googol, but with googolplex #100's (E100##(E100#2)), but unfortunately, he didn't define the -suplex, so I couldn't clarify googolplexisuplex using either Ea##b or Ea##b#c. ARsygo (talk) 04:32, November 17, 2017 (UTC) Suggestion If you're going to include the "clang" series from that blog post, you might include other terms proposed in that same blog post. Username5243 (talk) 00:19, November 21, 2017 (UTC) :Alright, I'll update the page ASAP. ARsygo (talk) 00:46, November 21, 2017 (UTC) A question I just thought of a way to make even more numbers. But first off, I have a question. Would the number googolplexispeck evaluate to E90#2 or E(E100-10)? I would think E90#2, based on how other suffixes get used (compare googolplexibit and googolplexichime, for example). Username5243 (talk) 00:11, December 3, 2017 (UTC) :Based on the -plex suffix, it would be E90#2 (101090) because n-plex means 10n rather than E(E100-10) or 10(10100-10), so googolplexispeck applies speck first before adding -plex. But it will becombe googolspeck-plex which doesn't sound good to me, so we reordered the roots as googolplexispeck. ARsygo (talk) 00:17, December 3, 2017 (UTC) Base plex and logue While you're including the load of things I named in my first blog post, don't forget that I allowed x-(base-y)-plex for xy and x-(base-y)-logue for yx. This should allow for an enormous amount of googolisms claimable using this powerful system. ArtismScrub (talk) 00:37, January 1, 2018 (UTC)